DOCSLIB.ORG

Two Districts): 1791-1800

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Two Districts): 1791-1800 Office of the Vermont Secretary of State Vermont State Archives and Records Administration United States Representative (Two Districts): 1791-1800 Italics indicate the winner. An asterisk * indicates that no candidate received a majority and a new election was required. These additional elections are called "new elections" to distinguish them from the "special elections" held as a result of a death or resignation. 1791 Western District* Matthew Lyon 597 28.1% Israel Smith 573 27.0% Isaac Tichenor 473 22.3% Samuel Hitchcock 355 16.7% Scattering 123 5.8% Total votes cast 2,121 77.5% Western District (September 6, 1791, New Election) Israel Smith 2,588 68.4% Matthew Lyon 1,112 29.4% Isaac Tichenor 85 2.2% Total votes cast 3,785 100.0% Eastern District No returns can be found; Vermont Gazette reports that Nathaniel Niles was elected by a majority of 150 votes. 1793 Western District* Israel Smith 834 44.2% Matthew Lyon 638 33.8% Isaac Tichenor 336 17.8% Samuel Hitchcock [Federalist] 79 4.2% Total votes cast 1,887 100.0% Western District (March 20, 1793, New Election) Israel Smith 1,928 51.5% Matthew Lyon 1,630 43.6% Isaac Tichenor 161 4.3% Scattering 22 0.6% Total votes cast 3,741 100.0% General Election Results: U. S. Representative (1791-1800), p. 1 of 6 1793 (ctd.) Eastern District Nathaniel Niles 586 60.3% Elijah Paine 136 14.0% Stephen Jacob 75 7.7% Paul Brigham 43 4.4% Samuel Cutler 38 3.9% Daniel Buck 34 3.5% Isaac Tichenor 21 2.2% Jonathan Arnold 9 0.9% Asaph Fletcher 9 0.9% Jonathan Hunt 6 0.6% Alexander Harvey 5 0.5% Calvin Knoulton 5 0.5% Benjamin Greene 2 0.2% Benjamin Henry 1 0.1% Samuel Knight 1 0.1% John Weld 1 0.1% Total votes cast 972 100.0% 1794 Western District* Matthew Lyon 1079 41.7% Israel Smith 852 32.9% Isaac Tichenor 256 9.9% Gideon Olin 224 8.7% Jonathan Robinson 32 1.2% Enoch Woodbridge 25 1.0% Samuel Williams 24 0.9% Jonas Galusha 18 0.7% Noah Smith 15 0.6% Ebenezer Marvin 14 0.5% William C. Harrington 12 0.5% John Strong 11 0.4% Jonas Safford 7 0.3% Samuel Hitchcock 5 0.2% Sammuel Mattocks 5 0.2% Ira Allen 3 0.1% Samuel Safford 3 0.1% Nathaniel Chipman 2 0.1% Martin Chittenden 1 0.0% Total votes cast 2,588 100.0% Western District (February 10, 1795, New Election)1 Israel Smith 1,804 48.5% Matthew Lyon 1,783 48.0% Scattering 130 3.5% Total votes cast 3,717 100.0% 1 Returns are imcomplete. General Election Results: U. S. Representative (1791-1800), p. 2 of 6 1794 (ctd.) Eastern District* Nathaniel Niles 673 31.6% Daniel Buck 452 21.2% Jonathan Hunt 235 11.0% Stephen Jacob 233 10.9% Lewis R. Morris 177 8.3% Cornelius Lynde 100 4.7% Paul Brigham 71 3.3% Lot Hall 58 2.7% Elijah Robinson 28 1.3% Stephen R. Bradley 17 0.8% Samuel Cutler 16 0.8% Reuben Atwater 13 0.6% Daniel Farrand 12 0.6% Royal Tyler 11 0.5% Benjamin Green 7 0.3% Benjamin Henry 5 0.2% Oliver Gallup 3 0.1% James Whitelaw 3 0.1% Asa Burton 2 0.1% Benjamin Emmons 2 0.1% Isaac Green 2 0.1% Israel Morey 2 0.1% William Bigelow 1 0.0% James Bridgman 1 0.0% William Buckminster 1 0.0% Alexander Harvey 1 0.0% Samuel Knight 1 0.0% Joseph Lewis 1 0.0% Alden Spooner 1 0.0% Ebenezer Wheelock 1 0.0% Total votes cast 2,130 100.0% Eastern District (February 10, 1795, New Election) Daniel Buck [Federalist] 1,151 56.4% Nathaniel Niles [Democratic-Republican] 803 39.3% Jonathan Hunt [Federalist] 49 2.4% Stephen Jacob [Federalist] 39 1.9% Total votes cast 2,042 100.0% General Election Results: U. S. Representative (1791-1800), p. 3 of 6 1796 Western District* Matthew Lyon 1783 40.7% Israel Smith 967 22.1% Samuel Williams 322 7.3% Nathaniel Chipman 310 7.1% Isaac Tichenor 287 6.5% Gideon Olin 198 4.5% Enoch Woodbridge 188 4.3% Jonas Galusha 147 3.4% Daniel Chipman 86 2.0% Samuel Hitchcock 52 1.2% Samuel Safford 8 0.2% Jonathan Robinson 5 0.1% Noah Smith 4 0.1% Ebenezer Marvin 3 0.1% William C. Harrington 2 0.0% Gameliel Painter 2 0.0% Timothy Todd 2 0.0% Ira Allen 1 0.0% Hubbard Barlow 1 0.0% Eli Cogfell 1 0.0% Doctor Cole 1 0.0% Roswell Hopkins 1 0.0% Levi House 1 0.0% Joshua Hyde 1 0.0% Chauncey Langdon 1 0.0% Samuel Miller 1 0.0% Nathan Osgood 1 0.0% David Robinson 1 0.0% David Sheldon 1 0.0% Josiah Smith 1 0.0% Enos Smith 1 0.0% Solomon Waldbridge 1 0.0% David Whitney 1 0.0% Samuel Williams 1 0.0% Peter Wright 1 0.0% Total votes cast 4,384 100.0% Western District (December 11, 1796, New Election)* Matthew Lyon [Democratic Republican] 1,611 46.9% Samuel Hitchcock [Federalist] 841 24.5% Israel Smith [Democratic Republican] 775 22.6% Samuel Williams [Federalist] 100 2.9% Scattering 107 3.1% Total votes cast 3,434 100.0% Western District (February 7, 1797, New Election) Matthew Lyon [Democratic Republican] 2,143 55.1% Samuel Hitchcock [Federalist] 1,143 29.4% Israel Smith [Democratic Republican] 346 8.9% Jonas Galusha [Democratic Republican] 151 3.9% Scattering 107 2.8% Total votes cast 3,890 100.0% General Election Results: U. S. Representative (1791-1800), p. 4 of 6 1796 (ctd.) Eastern District Daniel Buck [Federalist] 2,931 97.1% Scattering 88 2.9% Total votes cast 3,019 100.0% 1797 Eastern District (May 23, 1797, Special Election)2 Lewis R. Morris [Federalist ] 1,033 56.9% Stephen Jacob [Federalist ] 246 13.6% Rep. Nathaniel Niles [Democratic Republican ] 203 11.2% Amasa Paine [Federalist ] 119 6.6% Scattering 214 11.8% Total votes cast 1,815 100.0% 2 According to a letter from Governor Thomas Chittenden to Treasurer Samuel Mattocks dated April 6, 1797 (MsVtSP, Vol. 24, p. 182), Daniel Buck refused to serve another term in Congress, necessitating a new election. 1798 Western District* Matthew Lyon [Democratic Republican] 3482 49.8% Samuel Williams [Federalist] 1544 22.1% Daniel Chipman [Federalist] 1370 19.6% Abel Spencer [Federalist] 268 3.8% Israel Smith [Democratic Republican] 236 3.4% Gideon Olin 22 0.3% Samuel Hitchcock 16 0.2% Jonas Galusha 14 0.2% Moses Robinson 8 0.1% Jonathan Robinson 6 0.1% Scattering 19 0.3% Total votes cast 6,985 100.0% Western District (December 4, 1798, New Election) Matthew Lyon [Democratic Republican] 3026 51.7% Samuel Williams [Federalist] 2344 40.0% Israel Smith [Democratic Republican] 428 7.3% Scattering 55 0.9% Total votes cast 5,853 100.0% Eastern District Lewis R. Morris [Federalist] 3,220 85.0% Scattering 568 15.0% Total votes cast 3,788 100.0% General Election Results: U. S. Representative (1791-1800), p. 5 of 6 1800 Western District Israel Smith [Democratic Republican] 4,556 64.6% Daniel Chipman [Federalist] 2,494 35.4% Total votes cast 7,050 100.0% Eastern District* Lewis R. Morris [Federalist] 879 24.9% Nathaniel Niles [Democratic Republican] 872 24.7% Amasa Paine [Federalist] 552 15.6% Steven Jacobs [Federalist] 397 11.3% William Chamberlin [Federalist] 374 10.6% Lott Hall [Federalist] 195 5.5% Scattering 259 7.3% Total votes cast 3,528 100.0% Eastern District (December 2, 1800, New Election) Lewis R. Morris [Federalist] 1,529 56.8% Nathaniel Niles [Democratic Republican] 699 26.0% Amasa Paine [Federalist] 341 12.7% William Chamberlin [Federalist] 124 4.6% Total votes cast 2,693 100.0% General Election Results: U. S. Representative (1791-1800), p. 6 of 6.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Eastern District* Nathaniel Niles 673 31.6% Daniel Buck 452 21.2% Jonathan Hunt 235 11.0% Stephen Jacob 233 10.9% Lewis R
    1794 (ctd.) Eastern District* Nathaniel Niles 673 31.6% Daniel Buck 452 21.2% Jonathan Hunt 235 11.0% Stephen Jacob 233 10.9% Lewis R. Morris 177 8.3% Cornelius Lynde 100 4.7% Paul Brigham 71 3.3% Lot Hall 58 2.7% Elijah Robinson 28 1.3% Stephen R. Bradley 17 0.8% Samuel Cutler 16 0.8% Reuben Atwater 13 0.6% Daniel Farrand 12 0.6% Royal Tyler 11 0.5% Benjamin Green 7 0.3% Benjamin Henry 5 0.2% Oliver Gallup 3 0.1% James Whitelaw 3 0.1% Asa Burton 2 0.1% Benjamin Emmons 2 0.1% Isaac Green 2 0.1% Israel Morey 2 0.1% William Bigelow 1 0.0% James Bridgman 1 0.0% William Buckminster 1 0.0% Alexander Harvey 1 0.0% Samuel Knight 1 0.0% Joseph Lewis 1 0.0% Alden Spooner 1 0.0% Ebenezer Wheelock 1 0.0% Total votes cast 2,130 100.0% Eastern District (February 10, 1795, New Election) Daniel Buck [Federalist] 1,151 56.4% Nathaniel Niles [Democratic-Republican] 803 39.3% Jonathan Hunt [Federalist] 49 2.4% Stephen Jacob [Federalist] 39 1.9% Total votes cast 2,042 100.0% General Election Results: U. S. Representative (1791-1800), p. 3 of 6 1796 Western District* Matthew Lyon 1783 40.7% Israel Smith 967 22.1% Samuel Williams 322 7.3% Nathaniel Chipman 310 7.1% Isaac Tichenor 287 6.5% Gideon Olin 198 4.5% Enoch Woodbridge 188 4.3% Jonas Galusha 147 3.4% Daniel Chipman 86 2.0% Samuel Hitchcock 52 1.2% Samuel Safford 8 0.2% Jonathan Robinson 5 0.1% Noah Smith 4 0.1% Ebenezer Marvin 3 0.1% William C.
    [Show full text]
  • Warren, Vermont
    VERMONT BI-CENrENNIAI. COMMEMORATIVE. s a special tribute to the Vermont State Bi-Centennial Celebration, the A Waitsfield-Fayston Telephone Company has compiled a commemorative historical section for the 1991 telephone directory. Many hours of preparation went into this special edition and we hope that you will find it informative and entertaining. In 1979, we published a similar telephone book to honor the 75th year of business for the Waitsfield-Fayston Telephone Company. Through the years, folks have hung onto these books and requests for additional copies continued long after our supply was drpleted. Should you desire additional copies of the 1991 edition, we invite you to pick them up at our Business Office, Waitstield Cable, or our nunierous directory racks in business and store locations throughout the Valley. Special thanks go out to the many people who authored the histories in this section and loaned us their treasured pictures. As you read these histories, please be sure to notice the credits after each section. Without the help of these generous people, this project would not have been possible. In the course of reading this historical section, other events and recollections may come to mind. likewise,, you may be able to provide further detail on the people and locations pictured in this collection. The Waitsfield-Fayston Telephone Company, through our interest in the Valley’s heritage, wishes to continue compiling historical documentation. We encourage you to share your thoughts, ideas and comments with us. @ HAPPY20oTH BIRTHDAYVERMONT!! VERMONT BICENTENNIAL, 1 VERMONYBI-CENTENNLAL CUMMEMORATWE @ IN THE BEGINNING@ f the Valley towns - Fayston, Moretown, Waitsfield and Warren - 0Moretown was the only one not chartered during the period between 1777 and 1791 when Vermont was an Independent Republic.
    [Show full text]
  • Law and the Creative Mind
    Chicago-Kent Law Review Volume 74 Issue 1 Symposium on Commemorating the Two Hundredth Anniversary of Chancellor Article 7 Kent's Ascension to the Bench December 1998 Law and the Creative Mind Susanna L. Blumenthal Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/cklawreview Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Susanna L. Blumenthal, Law and the Creative Mind, 74 Chi.-Kent L. Rev. 151 (1998). Available at: https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/cklawreview/vol74/iss1/7 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarly Commons @ IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Chicago-Kent Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarly Commons @ IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. LAW AND THE CREATIVE MIND SUSANNA L. BLUMENTHAL* INTR O D U CTIO N .......................................................................................152 I. THE JUDGE AND HIS WORK .......................................................161 II. THE CHARACTER OF THE JUDGE, 1800-1850 ...........................166 A. The Antebellum Portrait....................................................... 170 B. Literary Manifestations of Judicial Character.................... 177 III. THE GENIUS OF THE JUDGE, 1850-1900 ....................................187 A. Remembering the Fathers of the Bench ...............................195 B. Reconstructions of the JudicialIdeal ...................................202 C. Providence
    [Show full text]
  • The Rise of Cornelius Peter Van Ness 1782- 18 26
    PVHS Proceedings of the Vermont Historical Society 1942 NEW SERIES' MARCH VOL. X No. I THE RISE OF CORNELIUS PETER VAN NESS 1782- 18 26 By T. D. SEYMOUR BASSETT Cornelius Peter Van Ness was a colorful and vigorous leader in a formative period of Vermont history, hut he has remained in the dusk of that history. In this paper Mr. Bassett has sought to recall __ mm and IUs activities and through him throw definite light on h4s ---------­ eventfultime.l.- -In--this--study Van--N-esr--ir-brought;-w--rlre-dt:a.mot~ months of his attempt in the senatorial election of I826 to succeed Horatio Seymour. 'Ulhen Mr. Bassett has completed his research into thot phase of the career of Van Ness, we hope to present the re­ sults in another paper. Further comment will he found in the Post­ script. Editor. NDIVIDUALISM is the boasted virtue of Vermonters. If they I are right in their boast, biographies of typical Vermonters should re­ veal what individualism has produced. Governor Van Ness was a typical Vermonter of the late nineteenth century, but out of harmony with the Vermont spirit of his day. This essay sketches his meteoric career in administrative, legislative and judicial office, and his control of Vermont federal and state patronage for a decade up to the turning point of his career, the senatorial campaign of 1826.1 His family had come to N ew York in the seventeenth century. 2 His father was by trade a wheelwright, strong-willed, with little book-learning. A Revolutionary colonel and a county judge, his purchase of Lindenwald, an estate at Kinderhook, twenty miles down the Hudson from Albany, marked his social and pecuniary success.s Cornelius was born at Lindenwald on January 26, 1782.
    [Show full text]
  • H. Doc. 108-222
    FOURTH CONGRESS MARCH 4, 1795, TO MARCH 3, 1797 FIRST SESSION—December 7, 1795, to June 1, 1796 SECOND SESSION—December 5, 1796, to March 3, 1797 SPECIAL SESSION OF THE SENATE—June 8, 1795, to June 26, 1795 VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES—JOHN ADAMS, of Massachusetts PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE OF THE SENATE—HENRY TAZEWELL, 1 of Virginia; SAMUEL LIVERMORE, 2 of New Hampshire; WILLIAM BINGHAM, 3 of Pennsylvania SECRETARY OF THE SENATE—SAMUEL A. OTIS, of Massachusetts DOORKEEPER OF THE SENATE—JAMES MATHERS, of New York SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES—JONATHAN DAYTON, 4 of New Jersey CLERK OF THE HOUSE—JOHN BECKLEY, 5 of Virginia SERGEANT AT ARMS OF THE HOUSE—JOSEPH WHEATON, of Rhode Island DOORKEEPER OF THE HOUSE—THOMAS CLAXTON CONNECTICUT GEORGIA Richard Potts 17 18 SENATORS SENATORS John Eager Howard Oliver Ellsworth 6 James Gunn REPRESENTATIVES James Hillhouse 7 James Jackson 14 8 Jonathan Trumbull George Walton 15 Gabriel Christie 9 Uriah Tracy Josiah Tattnall 16 Jeremiah Crabb 19 REPRESENTATIVES AT LARGE 20 REPRESENTATIVES AT LARGE William Craik Joshua Coit 21 Abraham Baldwin Gabriel Duvall Chauncey Goodrich Richard Sprigg, Jr. 22 Roger Griswold John Milledge George Dent James Hillhouse 10 James Davenport 11 KENTUCKY William Hindman Nathaniel Smith SENATORS Samuel Smith Zephaniah Swift John Brown Thomas Sprigg 12 Uriah Tracy Humphrey Marshall William Vans Murray Samuel Whittlesey Dana 13 REPRESENTATIVES DELAWARE Christopher Greenup MASSACHUSETTS SENATORS Alexander D. Orr John Vining SENATORS Henry Latimer MARYLAND Caleb Strong 23 REPRESENTATIVE AT LARGE SENATORS Theodore Sedgwick 24 John Patten John Henry George Cabot 25 1 Elected December 7, 1795.
    [Show full text]
  • 1901-1902 Obituary Record of Graduates of Yale University
    OBITUARY RECORD GRADUATES OF YALE UNIVERSITY Deceased during the Academical Year ending in JUNE, 19O2, INCLUDING THE RECORD OF A FEW WHO DIED PREVIOUSLY, HITHERTO UNREPORTED [Presented at the meeting at the Alumni, June 24th, 1902] [No 2 of the Fifth Printed Series, and No 61 of the whole Record] OBITUARY RECORD OP GKADTIATES OF YALE UNIVEESITY Deceased during the Academical year ending in JUNE, 1902, Including the Record of a few who died previously, hitherto unreported [PRESENTED AT THE MEETING OF THE ALUMNI, JUNE 24TH, 1902] [No. 2 of the Fifth Printed Series, and No. 61 of the whole Record] YALE COLLEGE (ACADEMICAL DEPARTMENT) 1829 SAMUEL PORTER, eldest of the seven children of Rev. Dr. Noah Porter (Yale 1803) and Hetty (Meigs) Poiter, and elder brother of President Noah Porter and of Rev. Giles M. Porter (Yale 1836), was born at Farmington, Conn., on January 12, 1810. After graduation he taught a short time m the family of a Virginia planter, and from 1832 to 1836 in the American Asylum for the Deaf and Dumb in Hartford, Conn. For two years he was a student in the Yale Theological Seminary, but increasing deafness led him to abandon the idea of entering the ministry. From 1840 to 1842 he was associate editor of the Congregational Observer in Hartford, then until 1846 instructor in the New York Institute for the Deaf and Dumb, and for the next twenty years in his former position at Hartford. From 1854 to 1860 he was editor of the American Annals of the Deaf and Dumb.
    [Show full text]
  • Family Histories: Ives and Allied Families Arthur S
    Family Histories: Ives and Allied Families Arthur S. Ives 241 Cliff Ave. Pelham, N.Y. Re-typed into digital format in 2012 by Aleta Crawford, wife of Dr. James Crawford, great-grandson of Arthur Stanley Ives Arthur S. Ives: Family Histories 2 Index Surname Earliest Latest Named Married to Page Named Individual (number Individual of generations) Adams, John (1) to Celestia (9) Arthur Ives 24 Alden John(1) to Elizabeth (2) William Pabodie 38 Aldrich George (1) to Mattithiah (2) John Dunbar 40 Or Aldridge Allyn Robert (1) to Mary (2) Thomas Parke, Jr. 41 Andrews William (1) to Mary (5) Joseph Blakeslee 42 Atwater David (1) to Mary (3) Ebenezer Ives 45 Barker Edward (1) to Eunice (4) Capt. John Beadle 47 Barnes Thomas (1) to Deborah (3) Josiah Tuttle 50 Bassett William (1) to Hannah (5) Samuel Hitchcock 52 Beadle Samuel (1) to Eunice Amelia Julius Ives 59 (7) Benton Edward (1) to Mary (4) Samuel Thorpe 73 Bishop John (1) to Mary (2) George Hubbard 75 Blakeslee Samuel (1) to Merancy (6) Harry Beadle 76 Bliss Thomas (1) to Deliverance (3) David Perkins 104 Borden Richard (1) to Mary (2) John Cook 105 Bradley William (1) to Martha (2) Samuel Munson 107 Brockett John (1) to Abigail (2) John Paine 108 Buck Emanuell (1) to Elizabeth (4) Gideon Wright 109 Buck Henry (1) to Martha (2) Jonathan Deming 110 Burritt William (1) to Hannah (4) Titus Fowler 111 Bushnell Francis (1) to Elizabeth (3) Dea. William 112 Johnson Chauncey Charles (1) to Sarah (4) Israel Burritt 113 Churchill Josiah (1) to Elizabeth (2) Henry Buck 115 Churchill Josiah (1) to Sarah (2) Thomas Wickham 115 Clark John (1) to Sarah (4) Samuel Adams 116 Collier William (1) to Elizabeth (2) Constant 119 Southworth Collins Edward (1) to Sybil (2) Rev.
    [Show full text]
  • H. Doc. 108-222
    SEVENTH CONGRESS MARCH 4, 1801, TO MARCH 3, 1803 FIRST SESSION—December 7, 1801, to May 3, 1802 SECOND SESSION—December 6, 1802, to March 3, 1803 SPECIAL SESSION OF THE SENATE—March 4, 1801, to March 5, 1801 VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES—AARON BURR, of New York PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE OF THE SENATE—ABRAHAM BALDWIN, 1 of Georgia; STEPHEN R. BRADLEY, 2 of Vermont SECRETARY OF THE SENATE—SAMUEL A. OTIS, of Massachusetts DOORKEEPER OF THE SENATE—JAMES MATHERS, of New York SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES—NATHANIEL MACON, 3 of North Carolina CLERK OF THE HOUSE—JOHN H. OSWALD, of Pennsylvania; JOHN BECKLEY, 4 of Virginia SERGEANT AT ARMS OF THE HOUSE—JOSEPH WHEATON, of Rhode Island DOORKEEPER OF THE HOUSE—THOMAS CLAXTON CONNECTICUT James Jackson Daniel Hiester Joseph H. Nicholson SENATORS REPRESENTATIVES AT LARGE Thomas Plater James Hillhouse John Milledge 6 Peter Early 7 Samuel Smith Uriah Tracy 12 Benjamin Taliaferro 8 Richard Sprigg, Jr. REPRESENTATIVES AT LARGE 13 David Meriwether 9 Walter Bowie Samuel W. Dana John Davenport KENTUCKY MASSACHUSETTS SENATORS Roger Griswold SENATORS 5 14 Calvin Goddard John Brown Dwight Foster Elias Perkins John Breckinridge Jonathan Mason John C. Smith REPRESENTATIVES REPRESENTATIVES Benjamin Tallmadge John Bacon Thomas T. Davis Phanuel Bishop John Fowler DELAWARE Manasseh Cutler SENATORS MARYLAND Richard Cutts William Eustis William H. Wells SENATORS Samuel White Silas Lee 15 John E. Howard Samuel Thatcher 16 REPRESENTATIVE AT LARGE William Hindman 10 Levi Lincoln 17 James A. Bayard Robert Wright 11 Seth Hastings 18 REPRESENTATIVES Ebenezer Mattoon GEORGIA John Archer Nathan Read SENATORS John Campbell William Shepard Abraham Baldwin John Dennis Josiah Smith 1 Elected December 7, 1801; April 17, 1802.
    [Show full text]
  • Washington City, 1800-1830 Cynthia Diane Earman Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College
    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses Graduate School Fall 11-12-1992 Boardinghouses, Parties and the Creation of a Political Society: Washington City, 1800-1830 Cynthia Diane Earman Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Earman, Cynthia Diane, "Boardinghouses, Parties and the Creation of a Political Society: Washington City, 1800-1830" (1992). LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses. 8222. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses/8222 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. BOARDINGHOUSES, PARTIES AND THE CREATION OF A POLITICAL SOCIETY: WASHINGTON CITY, 1800-1830 A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in The Department of History by Cynthia Diane Earman A.B., Goucher College, 1989 December 1992 MANUSCRIPT THESES Unpublished theses submitted for the Master's and Doctor's Degrees and deposited in the Louisiana State University Libraries are available for inspection. Use of any thesis is limited by the rights of the author. Bibliographical references may be noted, but passages may not be copied unless the author has given permission. Credit must be given in subsequent written or published work. A library which borrows this thesis for use by its clientele is expected to make sure that the borrower is aware of the above restrictions.
    [Show full text]
  • MIDNIGHT JUDGES KATHRYN Turnu I
    [Vol.109 THE MIDNIGHT JUDGES KATHRYN TuRNu I "The Federalists have retired into the judiciary as a strong- hold . and from that battery all the works of republicanism are to be beaten down and erased." ' This bitter lament of Thomas Jefferson after he had succeeded to the Presidency referred to the final legacy bequeathed him by the Federalist party. Passed during the closing weeks of the Adams administration, the Judiciary Act of 1801 2 pro- vided the Chief Executive with an opportunity to fill new judicial offices carrying tenure for life before his authority ended on March 4, 1801. Because of the last-minute rush in accomplishing this purpose, those men then appointed have since been known by the familiar generic designation, "the midnight judges." This flight of Federalists into the sanctuary of an expanded federal judiciary was, of course, viewed by the Republicans as the last of many partisan outrages, and was to furnish the focus for Republican retaliation once the Jeffersonian Congress convened in the fall of 1801. That the Judiciary Act of 1801 was repealed and the new judges deprived of their new offices in the first of the party battles of the Jeffersonian period is well known. However, the circumstances surrounding the appointment of "the midnight judges" have never been recounted, and even the names of those appointed have vanished from studies of the period. It is the purpose of this Article to provide some further information about the final event of the Federalist decade. A cardinal feature of the Judiciary Act of 1801 was a reform long advocated-the reorganization of the circuit courts.' Under the Judiciary Act of 1789, the judicial districts of the United States had been grouped into three circuits-Eastern, Middle, and Southern-in which circuit court was held by two justices of the Supreme Court (after 1793, by one justice) ' and the district judge of the district in which the court was sitting.5 The Act of 1801 grouped the districts t Assistant Professor of History, Wellesley College.
    [Show full text]
  • The Eighteenth-Century Debate About Equal Protection and Equal Civil Rights
    Columbia Law School Scholarship Archive Faculty Scholarship Faculty Publications 1992 Equality and Diversity: The Eighteenth-Century Debate About Equal Protection and Equal Civil Rights Philip A. Hamburger Columbia Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship Part of the Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons, Fourteenth Amendment Commons, Law and Philosophy Commons, Law and Race Commons, and the Legal History Commons Recommended Citation Philip A. Hamburger, Equality and Diversity: The Eighteenth-Century Debate About Equal Protection and Equal Civil Rights, 1992 SUP. CT. REV. 295 (1992). Available at: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/482 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Publications at Scholarship Archive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of Scholarship Archive. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PHILIP A. HAMBURGER EQUALITY AND DIVERSITY: THE EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY DEBATE ABOUT EQUAL PROTECTION AND EQUAL CIVIL RIGHTS Living, as we do, in a world in which our discussions of equality often lead back to the desegregation decisions, to the Fourteenth Amendment, and to the antislavery debates of the 1830s, we tend to allow those momentous events to dominate our understanding of the ideas of equal protection and equal civil rights. Indeed, historians have frequently asserted that the idea of equal protection first developed in the 1830s in discussions of slavery and that it otherwise had little history prior to its adoption into the U.S. Constitution.1 Long before the Fourteenth Amendment, how- ever-long before even the 1830s-equal protection of the laws and equal civil rights were hardly notions unknown to Americans, who used these different standards of equality to address problems of religious diversity.
    [Show full text]
  • Racism in Antebellum Vermont
    Racism in Antebellum Vermont Neither Vermont’s constitutional prohibition of adult slavery nor Judge Theophilus Harrington’s famous application of that provision ever really precluded the Green Mountain State from those expressions of racism that existed all over New England and beyond. By John M. Lovejoy wo historical events appear to have established Vermont’s re- sponse to questions about slavery and the existence of racism Tin the state. The first occurred in Windsor in July 1777, when the Vermont Constitution was adopted. It was the first state constitution to declare adult slavery unlawful within its borders. The second event took place in Middlebury at the Addison County Court House in June 1804, when the Honorable Theophilus Harrington, junior member of the three- judge Supreme Court panel, speaking for the court, declared that slave ownership in Vermont could only be proved by the production in evi- dence of a bill of sale for the slave signed by Almighty God, Himself. The court’s practical application of the law prohibiting slavery set for- ever the height of the “bar” over which challengers would have to jump. From that day forward no jumpers applied. The original thirteen colonies had a substantial accumulation of laws on their books, as well as spoken and unspoken codes, relating to ne- groes, mulattos, and Indians and, in several instances, to slavery itself.1 Vermont patterned a substantial portion of its constitution after that of Pennsylvania.2 However, because Vermont lawmakers were relatively unburdened by an existing legal history and its accompanying tapestry of laws, codes, and precedent-setting opinions, the drafting of the Ver- mont Constitution was a simpler process than in most of the other states.
    [Show full text]